What CPRs show: summary of major issues J.J. Brunner June 6, 2006

Policy context: transition to a market economy Gradual adoption of policy & legal framework for reorganizing HE in terms of market economy demands Policy principles and objectives HE is defined as a national priority (human capital, knowledge production, access for all groups) Need to adapt HE to new context; in particular, labor market demands and international standards Legal arrangements Decentralization (increased autonomy for HEIs, competitive provision, content liberalization) Quality assurance Funding mechanisms

Privatization & Marketization in HE Privatization: percentage of private enrollment Marketization: Percentage of total income from private sources Source: OECD (2005) and OECD (2005a); Central Asian countries: PCRs

HE system development System differentiation: Enrollment growth: Increasing number of State/private institutions; universities, academies, institutes; national, regional and local (branches) Program diversification: BA / specialists / MA Weak development of HE vocational programs (ISCED 5B) Enrollment growth: Mostly through fee paying students KAZ 86%; KYR 88%; TAJ 58%; UZB 49% (?)

Student access Enrollment expansion (Gross tertiary enrollment rates: KAZ 44,7; KYR 42,2%; TAJ 16,4%; UZB 15,7%) National (or institutional) entrance examinations Student grants assigned on a competitive basis (highest scores) and some positive discrimination But most students pay (some also “buy” private tutoring to improve their entrance chances) and probably those coming form low income families are being left out (e.g., students coming from technical-vocational secondary schools, rural areas, etc.)

Enrollment expansion, 1989-2003 (gross rates, % of population aged 19-24) Source: UNICEF-ICDC, http://www.unicef-icdc.org/resources/transmonee/Country_profiles.xls

Teaching performance In general, negative assessment of teaching quality: Insufficient number of qualified faculty Ageing of faculty Brain drain form the University to the private sector due to low salaries Poor quality of teaching infrastructure (equipment, libraries, IT) Curriculum: excessive content, supply-side driven design (low involvement of stakeholders) No indication of internal efficiency (% of graduates from corresponding age cohort)

Management, planning & regulation System level Increased institutional autonomy but persistence of centralized management and top down regulations Manpower planning through “state order” (and student quotas) increasingly with lower effect (reduced percentage and HEIs’ need to accept more fee-paying students) Teaching is regulated through education standards and “classifier” of specializations In general, lack of necessary information for system steering and management

Quality assurance Involvement of various government agencies and use of a set of diverse procedures: self-evaluation, licensing, attesting, accreditation (plus: interim examinations, final certification, ISO for management, government audits, international evaluations) No comprehensive approach, lack of relevant information, poor participation of stakeholders, mostly quantitative-administrative types of procedures Doubts about real impact of QA procedures on actual quality of institutions and programs

Labor market outcomes Lack of reliable information about graduates: HEIs do not follow their graduates; governments do not produce information about graduates’ labor market insertion (time to get first job, private rate of returns on HE investment, employer satisfaction, etc.) General sense of poor fit between supply and demand of graduates Oversupply in some areas & shortages in others, graduates working in areas different from their specialization, employer must (re)train graduates

HE funding Relatively low public expenditure on HEIs (as % of GDP or per student) In all cases, tuition fees are the dominant funding source Allocation of public funds is mostly input driven, rigid (line-item budgeting) and not linked to performance or outcomes Although governments favor diversification of funding sources, there is still little entrepreneurship on the part of HEIs Use of loan schemes is limited (with the exception of KAZ).

Adverse economic conditions Real GDP growth (index, 1989 = 100) Source: UNICEF-ICDC , http://www.unicef-icdc.org/resources/transmonee/TransMonee%202005.xls

Positive outlook Projected GDP Growth, 2006-2007 Source: ADB, Asian Development Outlook 2006 http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/ADO/2006/uzb.asp

Research in HEIs National expenditure on R&D is low (lees than 0,30% of GDP) Most of these scarce funds are allocated to the national science academies Weak link (or none) between NSAs and universities Research is defined administratively as part of faculty time In general, lack of competition for research funds No clear research priorities; no balance between basic science, applied research and development Weak links between universities and productive sector

Knowledge Economy Index Each bar shows the aggregate Knowledge Economy Index (KEI) score and the relative weight of different Knowledge Economy pillars to the overall country's knowledge readiness 8,05 7,96 5,97 5,37 4,01 3,67 3,31 2,24 Source: The World Bank, Knowledge Assessment Methodology, 2006 http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kam/mc_countries.asp?Region_ID=13&Region_Name=Europe%20and%20Central%20Asia

Issues for debate: policy recommendations

HE / Labor market (LM) outcomes LM relevance of HE studies: BA, professional specializations, MA What to do with technical-vocational short cycle studies Manpower planning in a market context and growing enrollment How can policy makers ensure that increasingly autonomous institutions will deliver the government’s education and social policy agenda? How can they ensure that financial incentives introduced for policy purposes do not cause HEIs to act sub-optimally – reducing diversity and responsibility and perhaps threatening their own financial sustainability? How can they ensure that the public interest is adequately represented?

Quality improvement & assurance Policies for improving faculty recruitment and performance How to design more effective and simple accreditation procedures How is the relationship between the State and institutions changing? Is it clear where the responsibility for risk and investment lies? Are the processes for monitoring and accountability appropriate to this relationship? Do HEIs have the autonomy they need to respond to the policy requirements of government and to market pressures? Does the system have adequate mechanisms to ensure that the public interest is represented as institutions become more autonomous and driven by their own strategic agendas?

Research How to integrate NAS into university structures What are the sources of income for research by universities and other public research institutions in your country? Is there a certain share of funding for which institutions are not accountable or that is not earmarked/pre-allocated for specific purposes? Have you recently introduced new funding mechanisms/agencies that increase competition between different research performers? Do you use evaluation procedures related to the different funding instruments in order to assess the effectiveness of such instruments? How to integrate NAS into university structures What can be done to increase research output Training of researchers

“Good practice” initiatives to develop research capacity Source: E. Hazelkorn, Developing Research in New Institutions, OECD - 2005

New research funding schemes Source: OECD, Governance of Public Research, 2003

Funding Students (loan schemes and scholarships; equality issues) Teaching (quality and, internal efficiency), Institutional capacity building, Research (competitive funds, priority areas) Who is ultimately responsible for the sustainability of the higher education base? Is it the State or the HEIs themselves? Is the public funding appropriate to maintain the long-term productive capacity of the HE system? How does the government secure the outputs it wants and what incentives does it need to provide to do so? Are the right incentives given to institutions? Do the funding mechanisms make it easier or more difficult for institutions to take a responsible long-term view of their investment needs?

Resource flows form and to HEIs Source: Ben Jonbloed, 2004 http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/engpap04fundinghe.pdf

Resource diversification matrix Source: B. Johnstone, The Financing and Management of Higher Education: A Status Report on Worldwide Reforms http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/ihec/policy/financing_educatioN_WB.pdf